While no one was watching

Dear Leading Ladies,

Everyone loves a good imposter story. Think of The Great Imposter, the 1961 film starring Tony Curtis and loosely based on a biography of Ferdinand Waldo Demara by Robert Crichton. Demara, a high school dropout, successfully impersonated – at least for a time – a Trappist monk, a prison warden, a Royal Canadian Navy doctor hailed as a “miracle doctor,” a New England teacher, and then the FBI agent assigned to track him down. How can we help but admire the chutzpah and talents of this guy?!

Then there was the film, Catch Me If You Can, starring Leonardo DeCaprio and Tom Hanks, and also based on a book, this time written by the imposter himself. Frank Abagnale Jr. impersonated a doctor, a lawyer, and a co-pilot for a major airline – and all before he reached the age of majority! Oh, and he was a masterful forger, a skill that made him the most successful bank robber in US history – at age 17. Again, you gotta admire the guts and brains.

So who do we have for an imposter today?

George Santos.

He can’t impersonate a doctor, a lawyer, a pilot, and certainly not a lawmaker. All he seems to be is a liar.

Liar, liar

He has claimed to be the child of Holocaust survivors. That's not true. And his lie disrespects the grief and generational pain that comes with being a descendent of survivors.

He has claimed his mother died because of her proximity to 9/11. That’s not true. And his lie disrespects the loss of those who really did lose loved ones on 9/11 and afterwards.

He has claimed he had close friends who died in the Pulse nightclub shooting. That’s not true. And his lie disrespects the families and friends who live with their loss every day.

He has claimed he went to a private prep school, graduated from college, and worked for Goldman Sachs. Oh, and that he has multiple real estate holdings. None of that is true. And the lie about assets opens the door for investigation into where the money came from for his excessive expenditures on restaurants, hotels, and airfare outside his state and district.

What is clear is that George Santos is one lousy excuse for an imposter.

With his swearing in yesterday, January 3, Santos’s colleagues have a responsibility to pursue the new congressman’s misdeeds and determine if they reach the level of illegality or just stupidity.

Lessons from a failed imposter

What can this latest public display of ineptitude and mendacity teach us?

While we are making and breaking New Year’s resolutions about eating better, exercising more, looking at social media less, and reading great works of literature more, we can also resolve to expect more of those who wish to serve us and those who give us the news.

How did George Santos get this far? Why didn’t CNN, MSNBC, or even Fox News vet him more thoroughly? We have a friend whose daughter spends all day in front of three screens investigating credit card fraud for her job. We half jokingly say that she can find out just about anything about anyone. Clearly, vetting candidates in this day and age is a few clicks away.

It turns out that the North Shore Leader, a small newspaper on Long Island with a circulation of about 20,000 broke the story months ago. A paper with a conservative bent, its leadership wanted to endorse a Republican candidate but found they couldn’t after discovering the lies Santos was perpetrating on the public, particularly about his finances.

But nobody listened. The North Shore Leader is just a little hometown newspaper with a small readership flying under the radar – even on Long Island, apparently. What happened is a prime example of what we can expect when local journalism is gutted and bigger papers no longer track news in towns and cities outside the metropolises. Tom Brady and Gisele Bundchen get divorced and we know what they had for breakfast the day they signed the papers. Anthony Fauci has a birthday. We know what flavor his cake was.

On the television news last week, the anchors were falling over themselves congratulating the reporters who uncovered the lies that Santos perpetrated on the public. Nice work, yes, but isn’t it a little late? The guy is now in Congress. Do we really think the voters would have been behind him if this information had been reported more widely before the election?

Looking ahead

There is probably enough blame to go around, but this seems like a good wake-up call for the media, the leadership of the Republican and Democratic parties, and for us, the voters. Political parties need to do thorough opposition research; big news outlets need to scan local papers routinely; and all of us need to support our local online and hard copy papers. The results will be more thorough vetting of potential imposters and other ne'er do wells.

Of course, that’s where it gets complicated. Some of us are old enough to remember when Sen. Thomas Eagleton of Missouri lost his chance to be vice-president because of news reports about his bouts of depression. Reportedly, he didn’t tell the presidential candidate, Sen. George McGovern, that he was treated for depression, had been hospitalized several times, and had undergone electroshock therapy. In today’s climate, when anti-depression medication is commonplace and far less stigmatized, would a prescription make a candidate ineligible for office? Probably not, but numerous hospitalizations and electroshock therapy might affect the public’s confidence in a candidate. Should it? Does the public have a right to know? Is it any different than a candidate having diabetes or high blood pressure? What is the public’s right to know about those conditions? These are tricky questions.

And then there are candidates’ children, siblings, and spouses. Does the public have the right to know about their failings, challenges or indiscretions? Do those have any relevance to a candidate’s ability to govern? Many such revelations seem like clickbait about the vulnerabilities anyone may face with various family members over a lifetime, rather than issues that can impact a lawmakers’ abilities to serve.

What we are calling for is vetting candidates to make sure they are telling the truth; that they are who they say they are; and can be counted on to be honest in their dealings, whether we believe in their point of view or not. Ferdinand Waldo Demara and Frank Abagnale Jr. were wildly entertaining characters in books and movies, but let’s not find their doppelgangers sitting in the House and Senate.

We only deserve better if we demand it, while also respecting the privacy of candidates when it comes to information that is not relevant to their service.

Our wishes to all for a happy new year!

Therese (she/her/hers)
Judy (she/her/hers)
Didi (she/her/hers)
Mackenzie (she/her/hers)
Leading Ladies Executive Team
Leadingladiesvote.org
ladies@leadingladiesvote.org